Teams

Jackson/40+/4.5/NOD/NOLTC

2026 NO Adult 40 & Over - Women Day · 4.5 NO (40&O) Women Day

17 players · average NTRP 4.36 / LOUISIANA

View scouting list →
Schedule6 played
2026-03-19vs Seale-Tafaro/40+/4.5/NOD/CPLost 12
W#1 DoublesSarah Jackson / Amy Farnsworth vs Kelly Derbes / Elizabeth Merrick6-3, 6-3
L#2 DoublesBrandy Green / Susan Taylor vs Amanda Seale / Lauren Tafaro4-6, 6-7
L#3 DoublesCorinne Marcus / Karen Herman vs Beth Blosser / Andrea Descant5-7, 5-7
2026-03-10vs Austin/40+/4.5/NOD/GACCWon 40
W#1 DoublesBarbara Fitz-Hugh / Elizabeth Wooten vs Robin Austin / Claire Lewis6-2, 6-2
W#1 SinglesMaryanne Pranikoff vs Trezmarie Zotkiewicz6-3, 6-2
W#2 DoublesSarah Jackson / Brandy Green vs Michele Bravo / Ronel Treuting6-1, 6-4
W#3 DoublesCheryl Webster / Anne Long vs Phyllis Jacomet / Stacey Messina6-2, 6-1
2026-03-05vs Austin/40+/4.5/NOD/GACCLost 12
L#1 DoublesElizabeth Wooten / Sarah Feirn vs Michelle Wagner / Phyllis Jacomet6-7, 6-3, 0-1
W#1 SinglesClaire Karas vs Robin Austin6-3, 6-0
L#2 DoublesKaren Herman / Cheryl Webster vs Claire Lewis / Stacey Messina6-0, 4-6
2026-03-03vs Melius/40+/4.5/NOD/MCCWon 21
W#1 DoublesKaren Eastman / Ginny Wirth vs Kimberly Calamari / Amy Neves6-3, 7-5
W#2 DoublesSara McCall / Anne Long vs Darbi Philibert / Megan Jaynes6-2, 6-4
L#3 DoublesKathryn Talbot / Mary Karas vs Ann Melius / Pamela Smallpage2-6, 3-6
2026-02-24vs Seale-Tafaro/40+/4.5/NOD/CPWon 31
W#1 DoublesSara McCall / Ginny Wirth vs Amanda Seale / Lauren Tafaro6-1, 6-1
L#1 SinglesSarah Feirn vs Riley Kennedy1-6, 3-6
W#2 DoublesMaryanne Pranikoff / Mary Karas vs Amy Macdiarmid Browne / Cynthia Cook6-3, 6-3
W#3 DoublesAnne Long / Kathryn Talbot vs Beth Blosser / Andrea Descant6-4, 6-4
2026-02-03vs Melius/40+/4.5/NOD/MCCWon 21
W#1 DoublesKaren Eastman / Ginny Wirth vs Jennifer Poulin / Ann Melius6-1, 6-0
W#2 DoublesMary Karas / Kathryn Talbot vs Pamela Smallpage / Darbi Philibert7-6, 6-3
L#3 DoublesAnne Long / Susan Taylor vs Kimberly Calamari / Amy Neves1-6, 3-6
A tie can be incomplete. Tell us if someone is missing.
i
Grouped by tie — one fixture, several lines. A line shows only when a player on it is someone we have indexed, so an early-season tie for a newly-added team can look short. This also means the line count here will not match the header, which counts individual player appearances.
Flight standings4 teams · 4.5 NO (40&O) Women Day
TeamWLInd. WInd. LSets lostGames lost
1Jackson/40+/4.5/NOD/NOLTC6017714147
2Melius/40+/4.5/NOD/MCC42141022184
3Seale-Tafaro/40+/4.5/NOD/CP15101433240
4Austin/40+/4.5/NOD/GACC1571738248

Ordered by team wins, then losses, then sets lost — the order USTA uses to seed a flight. Individual wins are lines, not ties.

See the full flight, with every team’s record

ScoutingWhere each opponent usually plays

Signed-in extra: whether this captain plays strict strength order or mixes it up, from every doubles line they have put out. Create a free account to see it.

Roster averages 4.17 estimated across 14 rated players. No lineup is published in advance, so the column below is where each player has actually been used — a captain's habits are the best available forecast. Sign in and claim your record to see who you have played.

4.47
Amy Farnsworth
usually #1 Doubles 100% · published 4.5
4.43
Barbara Fitz-Hugh
usually #1 Doubles 100% · published 4.5
4.43
Karen Eastman
usually #1 Doubles 100% · published
4.41
Ginny Wirth
usually #1 Doubles 100% · published
4.32
Sara McCall
usually #1 Doubles 50%, also #2 Doubles 50% · published
4.29
Elizabeth Wooten
usually #1 Doubles 100% · published
4.26
Brandy Green
usually #2 Doubles 100% · published 4.5
4.23
Claire Karas
usually #1 Singles 100% · published 4.5
4.16
Cheryl Webster
usually #2 Doubles 50%, also #3 Doubles 50% · published 4.5
4.07
Karen Herman
usually #2 Doubles 50%, also #3 Doubles 50% · published
3.97
Sarah Feirn
usually #1 Doubles 50%, also #1 Singles 25% · published
3.96
Kathryn Talbot
usually #3 Doubles 67%, also #2 Doubles 33% · published
Chrissy Connolly
published 4
3.70
Mary Karas
usually #2 Doubles 67%, also #3 Doubles 33% · published
3.64
Corinne Marcus
usually #3 Doubles 100% · published 4
Maryanne Pranikoff
usually #2 Doubles 50%, also #1 Singles 50% · published
Susan Taylor
usually #3 Doubles 50%, also #2 Doubles 50% · published
Established pairs

Doubles pairs from this roster with three or more matches together anywhere — ordered by performance against what the rating gap predicted, not by record.

Sarah Feirn + Elizabeth Wooten3266% gamesnot enough data
Mary Karas + Barbara Fitz-Hugh314 matchesnot enough data
Cheryl Webster + Karen Herman134 matchesnot enough data
Roster

Ordered by our estimated dynamic rating, which is why two players at the same published level are not tied — a published 4.0 says nothing about where inside the band someone sits. Lines played in this team’s season are shown beside each name.

4.5
Amy Farnsworth
6W–2L career · 1 line in 2026
<1%59%41%
4.47
4.5
Barbara Fitz-Hugh
6W–1L career · 1 line in 2026
<1%68%32%
4.43
Karen Eastman
7W–0L career · 2 lines in 2026
<1%69%31%
4.43
Ginny Wirth
8W–1L career · 3 lines in 2026
<1%74%26%
4.41
Sara McCall
10W–0L career · 2 lines in 2026
1%89%9%
4.32
Elizabeth Wooten
5W–2L career · 2 lines in 2026
2%91%7%
4.29
4.5
Brandy Green
13W–4L career · 2 lines in 2026
3%92%5%
4.26
4.5
Claire Karas
8W–4L career · 1 line in 2026
5%92%3%
4.23
4.5
Cheryl Webster
3W–6L career · 2 lines in 2026
13%87%1%
4.16
Karen Herman
1W–4L career · 2 lines in 2026
31%69%<1%
4.07
Sarah Feirn
18W–3L career · 4 lines in 2026
<1%59%41%
3.97
Kathryn Talbot
8W–5L career · 3 lines in 2026
61%39%<1%
3.96
4
Chrissy Connolly
1W–0L career · no lines in 2026
not enough data
Mary Karas
5W–2L career · 3 lines in 2026
98%2%<1%
3.70
4
Corinne Marcus
4W–6L career · 1 line in 2026
15%84%1%
3.64
Maryanne Pranikoff
9W–3L career · 2 lines in 2026
not enough data
Susan Taylor
1W–4L career · 2 lines in 2026
not enough data

Three percentages are where each player stands right now: the chance they are below their band, inside it, or above it, on the way they are playing this season. The number on the right is our estimated dynamic rating, which USTA never publishes. This is today rather than a forecast of December, because a forecast has to assume future matches and cannot know whether someone will even be offered them. Percentages are blank where a player has too few matches this season, or at a level where the model does not yet beat a base-rate guess; the estimate is a weaker claim than a probability and survives where those do not.

Not affiliated with or endorsed by the USTA. Ratings labelled as published are USTA year-end figures; anything we describe as an estimate is ours, not USTA’s. Match data is from USTA TennisLink.